Free Community College Will Kill Higher Education in America

    Ah, a new year. A time for new beginnings, right?
    Well, if you're the Obama administration, then fuck no.
    On their everlasting quest to completely destroy America from the inside out, the Obama administration moved on to the next phase of their plan on 1/8/15. They've destroyed the military, (everlasting wars, lowered physical requirements so weaker soldiers will be on the battlefield, thus, a more likely chance of them or others around them dying, etc,), the middle class, (outsourcing millions of jobs, destroying higher education so they can't move up, standard of living way outpacing wages, etc,), the economy, (with Obamacare, tax loopholes for the 1% and the top corporations, banks, strangling small businesses with government red tape overload, etc,), America's reputation abroad, (the endless wars, spying on people of other countries on the internet, giving billions to terrorists, fascist and undemocratic regimes, etc,) the millennial generation, (by making underemployment the norm, thus them having no money to hardly anything in life, suffocating student debt, making it impossible for them to save any money, etc), and the civil liberties of Americans, (with the slow, gradual erosion and elimination of the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments).
     (Billy May's voice): But that's not all!!
     Not content with the destruction mentioned above, the Obama administration has been chipping away at higher education for some time now. It is not a new front. From making it too expensive so students have to be in tens of thousands of dollars of debt for a degree that will do them nothing, from making the classes so easy that the students aren't learning the skills they need to know in order to be competitive in the weak, hyper-competitive job market, the Obama administration announced a new program that, if enacted, will spell the end of quality higher education in America:
     Community college will now be "free".

      At first glance, this sounds like a great idea. Higher education will now be more accessible to poor people, who need it the most to gain skills to get better jobs so they can move up in life. Students won't be burdened with so much student loan debt as before. But if you think about it for more than 2 seconds, (which is asking too much of the liberal retards who support this idea), you'll see that this is an absolutely horrible idea. Why? Because when you make something free, it is literally worth nothing. That's what the definition of free is. Think about having a college education that is, by definition, worth nothing. College diplomas will no longer help anyone in finding jobs or doing well in jobs. They'll be free bees, pieces of paper that say "I sat down in desks for a while, and I'm able to read and write."     

http://generationopportunity.org/issues/higher-ed/

    Here is just some of the highlights showing how utter pathetic higher education is in America:

• Only half of all college seniors believe their institution properly prepared them to enter the work force.
•  According to a 2014 USA Today poll, a  quarter of employers do not believe colleges have adequately prepped students for a job in their company, while 41 percent do not believe college graduates are prepared for customer service jobs.

     Having "free" community colleges will exacerbate the problems mentioned in the above article. The quality of higher education is already going down the tubes. Since students have to pay so much to enter classes, professors are afraid to fail anyone, because that would mean the student would have paid a lot of money for nothing. So, they make the classes super ridiculously easy, so that every student passes. But in making the class so easy, they won't be teaching anything. The students will learn nothing, no skills that they need in order to be competitive in the job market. That's how I'm able to get straights A's in my graduate school and at a community college for IT certification, at the same time, without even having to study or crack open a book at all. It's easier than elementary school. At least in elementary school I had to study to get good grades. In college now, I don't have to study at all. But I'm not learning anything, and I actually want to learn, I want to be challenged so that I will learn competitive job skills, but so far, through a whole year in a grad school and in community college, I have yet to learn a single damn thing. I ask the professors about this and they say there is nothing they can do about this because they cannot change how the course is taught.
    Having "free" community college will exacerbate this problem exponentially, damning an entire generation to poverty because there is no way they can learn just about anything in order to get jobs that will allow them to live on their own.      
    There is another major problem with the word "free."

 

    

    There is no such thing as "free." This new "free" community college still has to be paid for. Professors have to be paid, janitors have to be paid, police have to be paid, the electric bill still has to be paid. But student's tuition will no longer pay for those things, because under this new idea, they pay nothing. So, guess who has to foot the bill?

    That's right: Us. The people. The citizens. The poor and middle classes. We will see a tremendous increase in our taxes to pay for this. It will be crushing, as the lower class is ever increasing with people's money being strangled by tax after tax after tax. The middle class is disappearing in front of our eyes because people cannot make enough money, after taxes, to afford a middle class lifestyle anymore. This tax increase will already be on top of the fact that I pay 25% of my entire income in taxes, and I'm in the lowest tax bracket.

    The last thing the struggling American people need is more taxes. We're dying over here as it is, and this new tax will just be more misery. All for people to learn nothing. And you better bet that it will solely the lower and middle class footing this new bill. You see, Obama and his 1% cronies make sure that they and the top corporations have tax loopholes that they can utilize so they pay nothing on millions and billions in profits. So they won't foot the bill. They are privileged, so they can avoid it. So the bill comes to us, the lower and middle class, to pay for it all.

    In conclusion, a better idea would to be to lower college costs, not get rid of them completely. As said before, student debt is a huge and shameful problem in this country. Lowering college costs would go a long way to fix that, but eliminating it entirely would create a whole new set of problems.

People are obsessing over the wrong type of diversity

     It seems everywhere I turn, people, (mostly young dumb clueless liberals who think of their whining as "activism"), are nerd raging about how so and so institution needs to hire more minorities, how such and such place needs to have more women leading the place, how this and this school needs more minorities taking classes from it, how that and that business has too many white men working for it, etc, etc, the list goes on and on but they are all along these lines.
     While any business or institution needs to be fair to every race, gender, religion, etc, and while diversity is an important aspect of any group, it is not the main goal of the business/group.
      A car shop's job is to fix cars. A car shop's job is not to make sure it hires enough Hispanic people so liberals won't call it a racist business.
      The minute a business or organization starts to care more about "being diverse" than to deliver the product or service it is designed to give, that is when their quality of work goes down. That is when they don't perform as well. That is when they're not doing as good as they could. And this is one of the many contributing reasons why our country is starting to suck more and more. It isn't by far the main one, but that's not the topic of this post. Let me show a simple and quick example to illustrate what I mean.
      Let's say 2 grocery stores wants to hire 6 cashiers. 10 people apply to it, and the business ranks them by how good cashiers they are. 1 being the best cashier out of the 10, and 10 being the worst. Next to each number is the race of the person. For the simplicity of the argument, out of the 10 people, all of them are either Black, White, or Hispanic.
     1. Black
     2. White
     3. Hispanic
     4. White
     5. White
     6. White
     7. Black
     8. White
     9. Hispanic
     10. White

      Grocery store #1 has been brainwashed by liberal media. They think having a diverse staff is more important than being a good cashier. So they hire 2 people of every race, being "fair." So they hire numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 9.
     Grocery store #2 respects all races, and doesn't give a flying shit what race you are. They want good cashiers, so they do the logical thing and hire numbers 1-6.
      Now compare the two stores. Grocery store #1 skipped persons 5 and 6, even though they were better cashiers than 7 and 9. They passed up better applicants to be more diverse. So they end up with a worse workforce vs grocery store #2.
     Worse workforce=less work=less products/services= crappier products/services=worse company.
      Now, this one example might not seem like it can cause America to become a less desired place to live. But picture thousands of companies doing this for decades and decades. Over that time we have a huge percentage of the working population who are doing their job worse than someone else who applied. We have people entrenched in their positions who are lazy, rude, horrible workers who lower the quality of a company or organization. You wonder why the government can't get anything done? You wonder why the local restaurant consistently fails to do basic things like have a schedule for their workers, know of their own hiring process, have rude and horrible waiters, yet is still standing?  You wonder why the store clerk can do things slowly on purpose just to irritate you, and talk to you in a demeaning tone, yet still is able to keep his/her job throughout the years? You wonder why the office worker is head of her/his department yet takes an hour everyday to log into his/her computer because that simple task completely bewilders them everyday?!
     It's because we have people in their positions not because they were qualified for their jobs, but because of the color of their skin. By definition, that is racist: judging someone by the color of their skin. It's exactly what Martin Luther King. Jr deplored and spoke out against for years. And now people who claim to be inspired by him are doing the one thing he worked so hard against.
      Absolutely fucking disgusting.   
   

     

    Now let's move onto the second part of this post. Does anyone know why diversity is important in a company, organization, school, etc, whatever the case may be? Because people coming from different walks of life have different ways of solving problems, different outlooks on things, different ways of approaching a goal or challenge, different personalities, etc, etc, you get the idea. This leads to people being exposed to ideas, concepts, outlooks, etc, that normally they would not be exposed to if they were in a group of everyone who was the same. 

     More choices: a better opportunity to choose a better choice. Diversity brings increased worker productivity, increased profits, higher worker morale, etc, etc, because they are able to do things better, faster, more efficiently, due to the diverse pool of thought and ideas that they have available in their workforce. 

      Look at history. The high points of many countries and empires were at the time that they had many immigrants come together within their borders. This diversity brought profit and power. Islamic Caliphate, Roman Empire, Renaissance Italy, America in the 20th century, all had extremely diverse populations. These people brought their different experiences, life lessons, perspectives, etc, to the important industries: science, manufacturing, the arts, math, which made the country/empire more prosperous. 

     The problem with today's society that throws that diversity concept out the window is the emergence of total near encompassing, mainstream, bandwagoning culture that the vast majority of Americans are included in. So today, a company might have a diverse employee base by race, but by diversity of the mind, they are near monotonous. They all have the near exact same political beliefs, near exact same hobbies, near exact same way of thinking, near exact same personality, near exact same outlook on life, near exact way of working, etc, etc, the list goes on. 

     That is a workforce that doesn't think outside the box, that can't come up with a minority dissent on an issue, that everyone gets stumped on the exact same problem because they all think the exact same way and they can't picture thinking any differently, that is not adaptive, that cannot have a different opinion on an issue that is not the mainstream opinion, etc, you get the idea. 

     Monotonous workforce=less work=less products/services=crappier products/services=worse company. 

     In conclusion, you notice how I didn't put up any links or citations for anything I wrote. That's because I don't need to. You can understand everything I wrote using logic, reason, and a rational and linear thought process. Any verifiable facts can be easily found using a simple Google search. To reiterate, my two main points in this post are:

1. It is NOT the goal or requirement of an organization or business to have a diverse workplace. It's goals is to provide the product and/or service it was made to provide. If the best workers I can hire happen to be mostly of one race, I'm going to hire every single one of them, and not hire other people who aren't as good but are of a different race. That is not racist at all, it is common sense business practice.  
2. Diversity of the mind is WAY more important than diversity of race.             

P.S. Not all white people are racist. Not all white males hate everything that is not male and white. Not all males wake up every day and think "Oh how can I keep women down today?" Judge people by their statements and actions, not their gender or the color of their skin.

Why I'll be voting for Robert Sarvis and not Ken Cucinelli or Terry McAuliffe

     The election for Governor of Virginia is less than a week away. The candidates are Republican Ken Cucinelli, Democrat Terry McAuliffe, and Libertarian Robert Sarvis. Wait, there's a third candidate? I thought there was only Cucinelli and McAuliffe. I mean, that's all the media talks about, (Of course they do. They wouldn't want to give attention to a non-establishment supporter, RIGHT?!)

      I will be voting for Sarvis for a number of reasons. It's really no contest. Cucinelli and McAuliffe are both God awful candidates. It's a testament to both the parties' decadence that this is the best they can come up with. So here are the reasons:

1. Cucinelli opposes gay marriage. Sarvis supports it. 

     I'm as straight as they get, but I support gay marriage. Why? Because there's no reason not to. All the conservative arguments against gay marriage are complete and utter bullshit:

• Gay marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage. Really?! Look at the stats at marriages now in days. 45% of all marriages end in divorce is a low ball estimate, some estimates say as high as 65%. Abuse is rampant, cheating is a plague, people being their children's friends instead of disciplining them when they do illegal or immoral things is the new norm. So, all that doesn't ruin the sanctity of marriage, but gay marriage will? Yeah right. Someone else's marriage has no effect on how I see my marriage or what it means to me.
• Gay marriage is against Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc. No. It's. Not. You can read the Torah, Bible, and Quran from front to back, and you will find absolutely NOTHING about banning gay marriage. This is just another example of people using religion as a cover to protect their own hatred ideals. Besides, let's just say for argument's sake, that Christianity does ban gay marriage. Fine, then you personally, don't get married. But just because you think you shouldn't do something, does not give you the right to shove that ideal down someone else's throat, and say to them that they have to have the same opinion about this certain something that you do. 
• More gay marriages end in divorce that heterosexual marriages. There is no conclusive evidence that shows this. Yes, some websites say so, but other websites, which are just as credible, say no. So one of them is lying. Which one is it? I don't know. That's why it's inconclusive. Besides, let's just say for argument's sake, that more gay marriages end in divorce than heterosexual marriages. So, using that same logic, we should ban Christians from getting married, because more Christians get divorced than Muslims. We should only allow Muslims to get married in this country. If we made that law, people would be up in arms, rightly so, because that's infringing on their rights. So why should we do the same thing to gays if Americans would riot if that same thing happened to them? 
• Gay marriages lead to more trouble making kids, lower grades, etc. Again, no conclusive evidence. Sure, you can find a scientific study done by a influential organization that says so, but then you can turn around and find another scientific study done by another influential organization that says completely the opposite. Besides, even if it were true, since when did America ban everything except the group that is the best? That's like looking at schooling demographics, and banning all races from going to school except Asians, because Asians do the best in school. It's insane!

      2. McAuliffe supports fascist gun control, Sarvis does not.

       Gun control restricts peoples' inalienable right to defend themselves. It hurts law abiding citizens while helping criminals and thugs. There is really no argument here. The thing that will hurt citizens the most will be limiting magazines to only 10 rounds. I don't know about you, but if I'm facing 2 thugs each with gun that can hold 30 bullets, I'd sure as hell want a gun that can hold 30 bullets rather than 10. It's still possible to beat them, but a smaller magazine will just make it harder. And in a life or death situation, you want every advantage you can get.

     3. Cucinelli voted to not raise the minimum wage.

      http://votesmart.org/bill/3821/11799/50871/minimum-wage-increase#.UnFgFBBKQTs
      One of the most basic things they teach you in economics is that the minimum wage must be proportional to inflation and standard of living. Well, the neo-cons have been so successful in keeping the minimum wage down for decades, while inflation and the standard of living have skyrocketed. If the minimum wage was proportional to inflation today, it would be more than $10. (Look it up, I'm not gonna waste my time putting a link for this well known fact).
     Cucinelli follows the standard Republican mantra of not giving a flaming fuck about the poor people working their asses off to put food on the table. He just wants to lower taxes for his super rich friends and supporters, while squeezing the middle class out of existence and forcing them into the poor class.

      4. McAuliffe wants to increase Medicaid, furthering our national debt and furthering peoples' dependence on government.  Sarvis does not.

     http://votesmart.org/public-statement/800471/issue-position-healthcare-and-virginias-economy#.UnFidxBKQTs
     Where in the Constitution does it say that the federal government has the right to take money from hard working people and give it to other people? That's right, nowhere. The Constitution does not give the federal government the right to run such programs as Medicaid and Medicare. Those two programs are an overwhelming huge part of our federal debt. As tragic as peoples' stories are, we just cannot afford to keep these programs. They're running our country into the ground. Do I sound heartless because I don't want to give money to Grandma and poor kids? Maybe. But I don't think it is heartless to say to someone who is old and sick "I'm sorry, but I am in debt up to my eyeballs. My financial situation is a complete and utter wreck. I really can't afford to give you any money right now."
      What the government should be focused on is strengthening the economy enough so that people do not need to rely on Medicaid and Medicare and lowering ridiculous medical costs so they don't cost the same as a house to get a simple operation done. There's nothing in the Constitution saying that the states themselves cannot provide Medicaid and Medicare, just so as long as they don't use federal money. People should also change their spending and lifestyle habits so that they're not completely broke when they get old. For example, in many other countries, old people move in with their children when they cannot live and work on their own. The child then pays for much of their old parents' expenses, eliminating the need for such programs as Medicaid and Medicare.

      5. Both Cucinelli and McAuliffe do not want to legalize marijuana or end the ridiculous war on drugs. Sarvis wants to do both.
      http://www.robertsarvis.com/issues/drug-reform
     Cucinelli and McAuliffe both believe that the government knows what's better for you than you do. They believe the government knows how to better spend your money than you do. They believe that since they personally do not believe smoking marijuana is a good idea, then that means they should force that idea down peoples' throats, and make it so no one can smoke it.
      If you think that smoking marijuana is bad/immoral, fine, I have no problem with that. Then don't do it then! But don't try and make everyone else think that same way!
      Outlawing marijuana gives power to the Mexican drug cartels, because now they have a monopoly on selling the stuff, because legal companies can't. Estimates say that a whooping 60% of the cartels' profits come from selling marijuana:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/opinion/19longmire.html?_r=0

     Just imagine if every ABC store also sold marijuana, for example. You could get it virtually in any town, and for much cheaper, because getting stuff on the black market is always more expensive than getting something the legal way. It wouldn't be profitable for the cartels to sell it anymore. Boom. There goes 60% of their profits. With a crippled income, it makes it a hell of a lot easier to fight them. But Republicans and Democrats want the war on drugs to continue. They want Mexican citizens to be continued to get kidnapped and beheaded. Why? Because as long as there is a war right next to us, the government can continue to sell weapons to both the cartels and the Mexican government. War is a racket. They can continue to get money for training the Mexican army and police. They don't give a flaming fuck about the Mexican people. They just want money money money.  
     Prohibition didn't work with alcohol, and it's not working with marijuana. The government should not micro-manage peoples' individual spending habits on luxuries. They should stop viewing casual users as criminals, just like casual users of alcohol are not alcoholics.

     And there concludes my list. This is not a completely full list, just the top 5. Notice that both Cucinelli and McAuliffe both have ideas that I like. Cucinelli does not favor gun control. I agree with him on that issue. McAuliffe supports gay marriage. I agree with him on that issue. The thing is that their negatives far outweigh their positives. Sarvis is the only one where I agree with him on all the important issues and the majority of issues in general.

Robert Sarvis, Libertarian candidate for governor of Virginia

Vote on November 5th!